Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Upon comparing the allegations against the appellant with those against other co-accused who were granted bail by Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court concluded that there was “no major distinction” between their respective roles.
“Prolonged incarceration without trial amounts to infringement of right of an accused enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
“On 16-04-2022, 5 accused persons came on three two-wheelers, and inflicted grievous injuries on Sreenivasan and killed him by hacking his head and other parts of his body with choppers.”
“The Court, recognizing the significant delay in trial commencement and the uncertainty around its duration, granted bail to the accused and also extended the benefit of the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA.”
Delhi High Court: Chandra Dhari Singh, J., granted bail while referring to a catena of Supreme Court decisions with regard to the
Madhya Pradesh High Court: S.A. Dharmadhikari, J., allowed an application for bail which was filed for the fourth time, the first one
Delhi High Court: Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., granted bail to an accused involved in the Delhi-Riots in view of the principles of bail.
Madhya Pradesh High Court: S.A. Dharmadhikari, J. allowed the bail application on the ground that trial was not going to be over
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vivek Rusia, J. dealt with a bail application where the petitioner sought bail for the offence under Section
Madhya Pradesh High Court: This petition was filed before the Bench of Sheel Nagu, J., fourth time under Section 439 of Criminal